&w=3840&q=100)
Indian students delete posts to avoid extra scrutiny in US visa application
Indian students seeking admission to US universities are now deleting social media posts—or their accounts altogether—amid fears of additional scrutiny under the Trump administration.
The move follows an order by US Secretary of State Marco Rubio on May 30, directing embassies worldwide to begin vetting the social media profiles of foreign students applying to Harvard University. Rubio noted that even a lack of an online presence could be grounds for denying a visa.
A cable sent to embassies marked the latest escalation by US President Donald Trump's administration in its feud with Harvard. According to Bloomberg, Rubio said the outlined process would serve as a pilot project after student visa interviews were temporarily halted to explore new ways to screen applicants for potential national security risks.
Tensions between the Trump administration and Harvard have created uncertainty for prospective international students. Many fear their jokes, political posts, or activism could be misinterpreted during visa interviews.
Advisories to maintain responsible online presence
Education consultants are advising students to maintain a responsible digital footprint. A consultant cited in the report said that while the guidelines on what constitutes 'objectionable' content are vague, posts related to pro-Palestinian views or anti-American sentiments are likely to draw more scrutiny.
Social media vetting amid campus unrest
The announcement comes at a time of widespread pro-Palestinian and anti-Semitic protests on several US college campuses. Reports suggest the US government is using artificial intelligence to monitor social media and cancel visas of international students who 'appear to support' terror groups.
The vetting process will involve reviewing an applicant's online activity on platforms such as Facebook, X, LinkedIn, TikTok, and others. Officials will assess whether the applicant is deemed fit for entry into the United States based on their digital behaviour.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hans India
31 minutes ago
- Hans India
Patriotism vs posturing: The real battle for Bihar has begun
Operation Sindoor has upended Bihar's political terrain, transforming a routine electoral fight into a high-stakes clash between unapologetic patriotism and political posturing. Prime Minister Modi's fiery rhetoric and nationalistic messaging have struck a deep chord in a state where voters rever military might and national pride. As Nitish Kumar fades and Chirag Paswan eyes the future, the NDA's internal unity remains its biggest challenge—and greatest opportunity. The INDIA bloc, still fumbling with mixed messages and confused alliances, risks alienating key constituencies, especially in rural and border areas. With women voters, youth, and even sections of Muslims responding to nationalism, old caste calculations are no longer enough. Populist promises from Tejaswi Yadav may grab headlines, but it is the emotion unleashed by Sindoor that could sway ballots. The 2025 Bihar election isn't just about power—it's a referendum on identity, vision, and the nation's soul Operation Sindoor has redrawn the political battlefield of Bihar. What was once a predictable clash of caste-based alliances is now being recast as a confrontation between nationalism and perceived political opportunism. The upcoming assembly elections are no longer just about governance—they're about identity, pride, and clarity of purpose. Prime Minister Narendra Modi's 'Chun Chun ke Marenge' declaration from Bihar and his recent references to how the Sindoor of Indian women turned into a missile against Pakistan have reignited patriotic fervour. For the NDA, this surge of nationalism is a potential game-changer. In a state where voters respond powerfully to military heroism and national security, the INDIA bloc's hesitation, silence, or criticism of Operation Sindoor may be seen as a betrayal, especially in rural and semi-urban constituencies. But sentiment alone won't win an election. The NDA still has a complicated internal equation to manage. The BJP's prospects depend significantly on maintaining unity and clarity of leadership. Nitish Kumar, once a towering figure in Bihar's politics, now finds himself on the back foot. His popularity has dropped to around 18%, his public appearances are rare, and his gaffes have only fuelled speculation about his fitness to continue. The opposition mocks him as the 'Bimar CM of a BIMARU state.' This vacuum creates an opportunity for a new generation of leadership. Bihar's youth, increasingly politically aware and aspirational, particularly those eyeing defence and government jobs, are inclined towards parties with a strong nationalistic and development-oriented image. This makes the BJP's potential promotion of Chirag Paswan a tantalising prospect. Paswan has declared his intent to shift focus from national to state politics, hinting at a possible leadership transition post-election. But declaring a CM face now could create tensions with Nitish's JD(U), so BJP may play the waiting game. Meanwhile, Tejashwi Yadav of the RJD, the INDIA bloc's youth mascot, is gearing up with populist promises like the Mai Bahini Maan Yojana (Rs 2500 monthly to women), subsidised LPG, and free electricity. Whether these freebies can match the emotional and nationalistic connect forged by Operation Sindoor remains to be seen. Over the last two decades, women voters have emerged as a decisive force in Bihar politics. Since 2010, their turnout has consistently outstripped that of men. Recognising this, the NDA has doubled down on gender-targeted welfare and infrastructure. Mahila Haats, pink toilets, women-only buses, subsidies for e-rickshaws, rental assistance for female cops, and reservations in BSRTC jobs are ongoing schemes. Educational schemes like free cycles, uniforms, and reserved seats in medical and engineering colleges further aim to consolidate the female vote bank. Still, Tejaswi's targeted cash handouts could lure some segments of this electorate, particularly in economically vulnerable zones. The battle for women's votes may end up being the election's hidden decider. Bihar's political DNA has long been dominated by caste arithmetic. Traditionally, JD(U) leaned on Kurmi-Koeri (upper backward classes) support, RJD on Yadav-Muslim votes, and BJP on upper castes and urban voters. But these boundaries are blurring. Operation Sindoor, and the strong reaction it evoked across demographics, may shift traditional loyalties. Even Yadav and Pasmanda (deprived and downtrodden) Muslim voters in border areas may reconsider their stance if they perceive the INDIA bloc's stance as undermining national pride. Added to that a deeper fatigue is also settling in among sections of the Muslim electorate, weary of being used as mere vote banks. Modi's push to reach out to Pasmanda Muslims and the nationalist tone of Operation Sindoor could further erode the INDIA bloc's Muslim consolidation. Several smaller but significant players are poised to split votes and inject volatility into the election. AIMIM, led by Asaduddin Owaisi, is riding a wave of popularity among young Muslims following his fiery support for Operation Sindoor and denunciation of Pakistan's misadventures. While the party has sent a lukewarm proposal to RJD for alliance, insiders see this as more about optics than intent. From its current tally of five seats, AIMIM could double its count—largely at the INDIA bloc's expense. Prashant Kishor's Jan Suraj, contesting all 243 seats, is running a campaign unlike any other. He doesn't ask for votes; instead, he offers solutions. 'Even I might betray you if I win—so don't believe anyone blindly,' he tells voters. His emphasis on governance and local problem-solving may not win him power, but it may cut into the anti-incumbency vote, hurting INDIA bloc more than the NDA. Left parties continue to fade into irrelevance, with their vote share shrinking rapidly. Bihar is not a monolith. Regional nuances will heavily influence the outcome: North Bihar, especially Seemanchal and Mithila, is fluid and unpredictable, with AIMIM, RJD, and BJP all vying for dominance. Central Bihar could become the swing zone. If the NDA remains united, it holds the edge. Border districts—affected most by Pakistan's misadventures—may swing towards the NDA due to patriotic sentiment and the emotional aftershocks of Operation Sindoor. Early speculation suggests the NDA could bag between 125 and 150 seats in the 243-member Assembly. The INDIA bloc may secure around 70, while the remainder would be split among AIMIM, Jan Suraj, independents, and possibly the Left. A party or alliance needs 122 seats for a simple majority. Should the NDA cross the threshold comfortably, the post-poll narrative could shift to leadership. Chirag Paswan, youthful and ambitious, is a natural contender. With Nitish Kumar fading, the BJP could spring a surprise, especially if it helps maintain unity within the alliance while projecting a fresh face for Bihar's future. Rahul Gandhi has made Bihar a key focus, visiting the state more than any other in recent months. But his continued jibes against the army and mocking tone toward the Prime Minister have cost him dearly in the hyper-nationalist mood post-Sindoor. The Congress, far from rejuvenated, is dragging the INDIA bloc into confusion and controversy. His rhetoric—blaming Modi for surrendering to Trump, downplaying Operation Sindoor as a 'chutput war,' and alleging massive Indian casualties—risks alienating patriotic voters and playing directly into the BJP's hands. Poll analysts estimate that around 35 per cent of Bihar's electorate is committedly anti-BJP. This gives the INDIA bloc a base—but not an edge. With Modi's personal popularity, the emotional impact of Operation Sindoor, a robust women-centric agenda, and a fragmented opposition, the NDA holds a visible advantage. But Bihar is a land of last-minute swings and layered loyalties. The real battle will be decided by how effectively the NDA manages its internal dynamics, and how smartly the INDIA bloc reinvents its narrative—if at all. In 2025, Bihar won't just vote for governance. It will vote for identity, vision, and direction. Operation Sindoor didn't just change military dynamics—it may well have changed the political future of one of India's most complex states. (The author is former Chief Editor of The Hans India)
Mint
35 minutes ago
- Mint
Pakistan writes 4 letters to India, urging them to reconsider decision to suspend Indus Waters Treaty
Pakistani authorities reportedly wrote letters to their Indian counterparts several times since April to reconsider the decision to suspend the Indus Waters Treaty, sources said on Friday. India had announced its decision to suspend the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) of 1960 with Pakistan on April 23 — a day after at least 26 people were killed in the Pahalgam terror attack. The Ministry of External Affairs had then said that the Indus Waters Treaty will be held in "abeyance" until Pakistan irreversibly ends its support for cross-border terrorism. Over a month later, the Hindustan Times reported that Pakistan's water resources secretary Syed Ali Murtaza sent four letters to India's Jal Shakti ministry since then, urging a review of the decision to suspend the treaty. It wasn't immediately clear when the letters were sent, but a person aware of the matter said that three of the letters were written after Operation Sindoor, the report added. Sources told the Hindustan Times that the Pakistani side continued to claim that the treaty cannot be unilaterally suspended by India and that the suspension violates the pact's provisions. The letters were said to be a response to a formal notification on April 24 from India's water resources secretary Debashree Mukherjee to her Pakistani counterpart about the decision to keep the treaty in abeyance. Mukherjee had reportedly written: 'The obligation to honour a treaty in good faith is fundamental to a treaty. However, what we have seen instead is sustained cross-border terrorism by Pakistan targeting the Indian Union territory of Jammu and Kashmir.' There has been no response by India to Pakistan's letters so far. Sources, however, claimed that India 'remains firm on its decision.' External affairs ministry spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal reiterated on April 29 that the country would not engage in talks with Pakistan until the neighbour 'credibly and irrevocably abjures cross-border terrorism.' According to the report, the Indian side has stopped sharing all data related to the flows of the western rivers – Indus, Jhelum, and Chenab – that were allocated to Pakistan under the 1960 treaty. Pakistani leaders said earlier any reduction of water flows allowed under the Indus Waters Treaty will be seen as an 'act of war.' The Indus Waters Treaty has survived four wars between India and Pakistan since its signing in 1960, making this the first time the pact has been suspended.
Time of India
36 minutes ago
- Time of India
Social Security privacy concerns mount as US Supreme Court authorises DOGE's access to data of millions of Americans
The US Supreme Court on Friday sided with the Trump administration in two critical decisions involving the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). The rulings allow DOGE broad access to personal records held by the Social Security Administration (SSA) and delay enforcement of transparency rules sought by a government watchdog group. By a 6-3 vote, the conservative-majority court granted DOGE permission to access sensitive SSA databases containing the personal details of millions of Americans. This includes financial, educational and medical data. The court also paused a lower court's ruling requiring DOGE to comply with the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), allowing the administration to withhold internal documents about DOGE's operations. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Belly Fat Removal Without Surgery in Algeria: The Price Might Surprise You Belly Fat Removal | Search Ads Undo Rising concerns over privacy and oversight Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson dissented sharply, writing: 'This court has now greenlit unfettered data access to DOGE regardless—despite its failure to show any need or any interest in complying with existing privacy safeguards, and all before we know for sure whether federal law countenances such access.' Her concerns were echoed by Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan. Together, they warned that the court's action posed 'grave privacy risks' to millions of Americans. Live Events The SSA holds data on anyone with a Social Security number, Medicare, or Supplemental Security Income. It administers $1.5 trillion in federal payments annually, distributing benefits to over 70 million recipients. Nancy Altman, president of Social Security Works , said, 'There is no way to overstate how serious a breach this is. And my understanding is that it has already occurred.' Fallout after Musk's departure from DOGE Elon Musk, who once led DOGE, formally cut ties with the agency on 30 May. His split with President Trump became public shortly after, igniting tensions on social media. The two previously worked closely, with Trump assigning DOGE and Musk to investigate fraud within SSA. In February, SSA's acting commissioner Michelle King resigned after refusing to provide DOGE staff access to personal records. She stepped down after 30 years in government service, citing concerns over data misuse. A day later, the White House said it had appointed a temporary 'anti-fraud expert' to oversee SSA. Press secretary Karoline Leavitt stated, 'They haven't dug into the books yet, but they suspect that there are tens of millions of deceased people who are receiving fraudulent Social Security payments.' Leavitt added the mission was to, 'Number one, to identify duplicate payments and to end them. Number two, to identify payments that are going to deceased people who are no longer living and should no longer be receiving that money. And number three, to protect the integrity of the system for hardworking Americans who have been paying into it their entire lives.' Legal battle over Government transparency In a separate ruling, the court also halted an order from Judge Christopher Cooper, who had instructed DOGE to comply with FOIA requests. The suit, filed by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), sought records about DOGE's internal decision-making, particularly its role in mass federal layoffs and restructuring. CREW argues that DOGE functions as a de facto government agency and must follow federal transparency laws. The administration insists DOGE is merely an advisory body and is therefore exempt. Judge Cooper previously concluded that DOGE likely exercises 'substantial independent authority' and ordered a deposition of DOGE official Amy Gleason. The US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit refused to block his order, prompting the administration to appeal to the Supreme Court. In its unsigned opinion, the court noted that Judge Cooper's orders 'are not appropriately tailored' and stressed that 'judicial deference and restraint' were required in reviewing internal executive branch communications. CREW responded in court filings that if the administration prevails, presidents could 'create new entities that would functionally wield substantial independent authority but are exempt from critical transparency laws.' DOGE has become a key tool in Trump's broader plan to cut government spending and reduce federal workforce numbers. It has also faced mounting legal challenges from labour unions and advocacy groups. Solicitor General D. John Sauer called earlier judicial rulings an 'overreach' into executive power. However, critics argue that unchecked access and lack of oversight could result in lasting harm to public trust and data security . Maryland District Judge Ellen Hollander, whose SSA data access restriction was overturned, earlier warned that DOGE's search for fraud was a 'fishing expedition.' Her order allowed only limited access to anonymised data unless DOGE could demonstrate a specific need. Despite Friday's rulings, the future of DOGE remains uncertain. With Musk gone and legal scrutiny intensifying, its role in reshaping federal oversight continues to spark debate over accountability, privacy, and the limits of executive power.
